Genres

Visitors Review

bladingfp 2012-05-25 05:18:47

GoodHomies

I enjoyed the movie, but an original masterpiece it ain't. Frank's(Denzel W's)explosive and irrational character is basically a blackversion of Warren Beatty's BUGSY and the rest of the movie is full ofclichés' that we've seen a hundred times before; they simply substitutethe stereotypical Italian character with a black man. Particularlystrange was Frank's dialect going from "ghetto black" to Harvardeducated white(depending on his mood).But for me, what really separatesthis movie from the true American gangster classics (Godfather orGoodfellas), is they were based on fact; American Gangster is purefiction. Not a mention of the racial tensions of the early 70's, infact we are supposed to accept that no brow is raised over Frankmarrying a non-black girl; even momma declares "she's the mostbeautiful woman in the world". Frank's family, inner circle and entireworld is an organized and well run fictional BLACK euphoria ...emphasis on the word FICTIONAL.

arieliondotcom 2012-05-24 19:52:21

Spoilers: "Big D" the Wannabe

The sad thing about this movie is that it won so many accolades in atime of such sick political correctness that saying "We were better atbeing gangsters than you" is seen in a positive light and transparentlyripping off other directors gets you an Academy Award and othernominations. Big "D" (Denzel) does a great Tony Soprano imitation in abad rip-off of the Sopranos. Although based on a true story the movieis clearly a knock-off of "the Sopranos" and of the Godfather. (Forexample, the culminating moment of the film where it all "comes down"happens intermixed with the family piously in church, a la theculminating point of The Godfather.But as I say, the worst is that this is held up as the best to whichBlack youth can aspire. As one (white) character says, incredulously,among epithets, (paraphrased) "You're saying Blacks could be bettermobsters than the Italians and that's impossible." As if we're supposedto say "Damned straight they can! Whoopee!" How ridiculous and how sadthat this is held up as some sort of goal to be met or surpassed. Andthen, the "good guy" works hard to get the "bad guy" off easy. Howgrand.The American, and especially, the Black, culture deserves better thanthis. Film deserves better than this. Politically correct though it maybe to promote it and whatever fantasies Denzel had and to award thistravesty, don't waste your money, your time or the aspirations of yourchildren in seeing this trash.

Spicy_Comrade 2012-05-16 21:30:06

Very entertaining, even if it does nothing new.

well Crowe and Scott are back again which is not a bad thing although ithink they might be getting a little to comfortable with each other,but I'm getting ahead of myself lets break it down.let me sum this up for 2 people1. the people who have seen films like French connection, new jackcity, godfather and the endless lines of clones you will basically beseeing the French connection/ new jack city, even though those filmswere taking story elements from the real frank Lucas' career you canthelp but see the similarities and the film becomes a lesser filmbecause of it2. those who haven't seen anything about mobsters or cops trying totake down mobsters before, well than this is a 9/10 10 out of ten foryou unless your a smart person then the story itself will bring it to a8 or 7/10story: 1/3 of this is really entertains too much is going on way toomuch between Russell's custody of his kid, (who we see once and aresupposed to feel for) and power struggles between Mr. Washington'scountry boy brothers who are new to the flashy take whats yours lifestyle that frank has and his brothers (who we also touch on for only asecond) and Mr. Washington wife coming to terms with her husbandsdealings (should of scraped that story all together along withRussell's kid)the story itself you've seen it before many many times. its a simpleretelling of much better films, but its told very well with as always afully realized view of the world that Scott is showing you. Everythingis muted and full of dark grays, in Russell's world it has that greatnew jersey bleakness to it and in Mr. Washington's world although moreviolent is altogether more vibrant and also darker at the same time.The look of this film itself is a 10/10. there is a great film in heresomewhere and had it been a 3 1/2 hour epic film it would be winningawards across the table, but alas its a 2+ hour semi-epic trying tobreak free from the confines of a self contained studio film. from thebeginning i thought this was a fiction tale but of course, it is basedon a true story and it is a very good one. i wish they had spent moretime on just how does one black man in that era build this empire, nowthat is a story that hasn't been touched on enough but ultimately itshows how he gets his one connection: he gets the house and the otherusual rap song trimmings and then comes the regularly scheduled loveinterest, who is given nothing to do. i could care less about her sheapparently doesn't care what frank does as long as she gets fur coatsbut we've sen that overused plot device for years now and frankly I'msick of it id rather frank be gay so at least it be something differentafter a killer start an OK middle and a by the motions 3rd act i wasleft wondering and hoping that there is, a as always a Mr.Scottdirectors cut out there with the hour and a half of characterdevelopment that is sorely neededacting; as i said before i think Scott and Russell are getting tocomfortable with each other Russell's performance is strange hesupposed to be a bumbling civil servant who turns hard ass throughoutthe movie, but something about it just doesn't work for me. at times heseems too relaxed but ultimately the character itself isunder-developedas for Mr. Washington the man can do no wrong in my eyes, he reallymakes this film. As we already know its fun as hell to watch him playthe bad guy and you can tell hes having a lot of fun with it too, ionly wish we saw more of him being really ruthless but instead we justget the usual initial set-up to his being a bad ass. But its damn funto watch.bottom line: there are much better films on this subject most of themcan be found from 70's. unless you are not a big film goer then settlein and watch a very entertaining film even if it does nothing new.p.s. i don't know who fixed up this comment section for i.m.d.b. but ifi cant use the actors name what good is it. thats why i had to use Mr.Washington and Russell because i.m.d.b. does not recognize Mr.Washington's first name Mr. Scott's first or Russell's last.

dwpollar 2012-05-16 17:08:59

Good crime story based on a true story...

1st watched 4/22/2009 – 6 out of 10 (Dir-Ridley Scott): Good crimestory based on a true story about a drag trafficking African Americanman, played by Denzel Washington, in the late 60's who started a heroinbusiness smuggling drugs from Vietnam through military personnel. Heworked with his cousin to find the purest form of the drug and get itsmuggled in shipments to the U.S. and employed others in his family todistribute it. He formed a company around his family similar to othermafia groups and used some of the same violent tactics to keep himselfon top. Russell Crowe plays a detective who puts together a group tosniff out the drug lords and the characters run parallel to each otherin the story until near the very end. The story is gritty and told wellwith good acting although there's not a lot of positive things to hangonto(I guess that's the nature of the story, though). Thematter-of-fact way of storytelling works at times but not at others.The movie is slow at the beginning but it eventually pulls you in andgains your attention. I also like the way the director showed how eachcharacter didn't really receive their due rewards till the very end.The good guy had bad times and the bad guy lived it up most of themovie which is unfortunately more the way it is in real life. Theending is a little bit corny when the characters hook up to put badcops in jail, but I guess they had to throw in something positive. Allin all this was a good movie, but not great.

2012-05-15 09:43:32

Long but good

This review is from: American Gangster (2-Disc Unrated Extended Edition) (DVD) I must say I really liked this movie, it is long but a very absorbing film not to violent, it may have been based on a true story but there is some stretching in the tale to be sure but it still makes a very good movie, both leads are excellent in their roles, In my book a must see movie

lucasaq-1 2012-05-15 02:58:16

It Delivers The Goods, But Watch Out For Confusing Middle Section

Frank Lucas and Richie Roberts may not appear to be so, but they areflip-sides of a coin. Frank Lucas starts off as a little time bosses'apprentice while Richie Roberts starts off as a regular undercover copattempting to climb into a better calling. Each have a choice for whichdirection they want to live their lives and each choose almost polaropposite directions. Frank Lucas becomes the most feared gangster inAmerica by selling drugs to his own people and trampling all theopposition while Richie Roberts takes the justice side of becoming themost hated police officer in the force because he does the right thingand doesn't cheat under the table. It is a fabulous tale of how theirpaths cross as one must take down the other to achieve his goal and inthe process perhaps let another achieve his forgot dream as well.I don't want to reveal much more, but I will say this Denzel Washingtonand Russell Crowe nail their roles. One maybe flashier than the other,but I consider both just as great. There are a multitude of greatsupporting players here as well from Josh Brolin to Chiwetel Ejiofor. Ithink this reflects well upon the director Ridley Scott as he gets sortof Godfather effect from this crew.The film itself is edgy chalk full of violence from beginning to thevolatile ending which has a great amount of twists. It begins with theburning a man and ends with burning of ones past in a new world.Beautiful circle screenplay here, but it is not without its problems asthe middle section exemplifies with a confusing editing job about thechronological path of the film. That is about my biggest complaint ofthis film which is quite long with a running time of nearly 3 hours.It will satisfy fans of the trailer with its style and satisfy thecritics with its structure and underlining story, but this film couldhave used a bit of trimming to save a bit of the confusion. Otherwise,I have no problem with this film following in The Departed footsteps.

2012-05-05 02:59:14

Brutal yes; and well directed

I agree with the brutal expression chosen for describing this movie. It is very hard to wacht. But if you were familiar with 70's cinema(a new form of classics) this is the movie to pay attention to.Full of what is called intertexts and references, it is produced as many of what I call the "new movies": composed in the form of related spots which are unified but have an unity by themselves. Even very well known actors (as Cuba Gooding, Jr.) protagonizes one of the spots.I disagree with the view that Russel Crowe do not play his part well. At the contrary, he, a Ridley Scott favorite, shines in some of these spots. It is amazing how this guy, who came from Australia, fitted so well in American movies.And Denzel, what can be said? he is a bombshell, born to be an actor since the first Spike Lee's movies.

policy134 2012-05-04 15:48:18

Scott doesn't bring anything new to the already over-exhausted genre

Really disappointing. I am not a fun of most of Ridley Scott's movies.I thought Blade Runner, although a triumph in stylish production designwas a very dull experience. Gladiator had the same problems, althoughJoaquin Phoenix and Connie Nielsen gave excellent performances. Thebest film of his is one of his most mainstream, Thelma & Louise and itis vastly overlooked today as a great achievement in both story andeerie, almost ghoulish style.I have to be very careful here because I know that in each of his filmsthere are commendable elements and the same applies here. I don't knowif it's the jumping back and forth between the two main characters orif it was the storyline of the Vietnam connection. It seems like we arebeing taught history instead of being absorbed in the story.The plot keeps the two main characters apart for most of the runningtime, maybe trying for a Heat-like approach. The problem is that asindividual characters they are totally uninteresting (a fact made evenmore sad when you think of the caliber of the actors, especiallyRussell Crowe). A subplot about Crowe's character is totallyunnecessary and could have been cut right out without an audiencenoticing.Denzel Washington is supposed to be charming and dangerous at the sametime but doesn't really succeed. There are several gap in his storyline(mind you I have not seen the director's cut). He virtually goes fromnothing to a big shot in 2 seconds.At last, Crowe and Washington's big scene together at the end. It seemsfalse, smarmy and you can almost see the winking at the audience. Okay,maybe that's exaggerating but if Scott was trying to emulate a similarscene in Heat, he failed immensely. The epilogue tells what laterhappened to Frank Lucas, and at that point I thought: "Who cares?" Thestory was uninteresting so why make a point of showing that it wasactually based on real people.

DJAkin 2012-05-02 01:48:11

Move over Don Corleone, Frank Lucas is in town

If you are looking for a movie that is fast paced, this is not it. Thismovie was really show but don't worry, it was a good slow. DenzelWashington keeps making great movies. This time he was a rich man whosold heroin on the streets of New Jersey and Harlem. I loved RussellCrowe's amazing ability to move out of his Aussie accent and into aJersey accent. Then there was the corrupt cop played by Josh Brolin.Geeze, he sure was mean wasn't he? And he was just in that movie calledNo Country for Old Men which was also excellent. I sure hope that thecommentary is interesting on this movie when the DVD release comes out.One of the climactic scenes was when Denzel and Crowe were pushing thecoffee back and fourth across the table. The tension was so thick, youcould have cut it with a razorblade!!

BroadswordCallinDannyBoy 2012-05-01 12:23:00

Greater things

If Denzel Washington did not exist, it would be necessary to inventhim. I guess while we're add it we just might as well throw RidleyScott and Russell Crowe onto the "necessary inventions" list. Reasonbeing is that we need people like them. We need people who can embodyand portray things greater than the average man. Now on a personallevel Denzel Washington (and others like him) is just a person like youand me. He gets up, eats breakfast, goes to work and occasionallythinks of a crude joke. Nevermind the fact that he gets $20 million perassignment, that's just his good fortune. Fact is, that when he is onscreen, often times, he isn't just Denzel anymore. He's anencapsulating presence that you're fascinated by. Or in this case ofportraying Frank Lucas, intimidated by. He portrays a ruthless,calculating and clever business man (aka a gangster), but Frank Lucasalso embodies a certain sense of virtue. He may be greedy andtreacherous in his methods, but he has a strong sense of diligence andhonor. In one scene Lucas says, "The most important thing in businessis honesty, integrity, hard work... family... never forgetting where wecame from." That's something every working man should adhere to.Yet why are so many tales of honor and virtue about criminals? Peoplewho by definition have too little or none? In this case I think thedefinition is wrong, they don't too little, they have a lot in fact.But they get things done their way. Honor among thieves. They may roband corrupt (Frank Lucas was far from being an angel) but the factremains they know how to get things done and get it done real good.That is the primary fascination we have with people who venture beyondour established laws and say "I'm gunna do it my way." The leap fromthe rules allows them to create their own laws, their own crimes, andas they form they are seen at the essence for what they are, which isthe same old virtue and vice most of us deal with.The other side of the spectrum is Ritchie Roberts, the man trying tobring Frank Lucas down and he is in a way similar. He is given chargeof a special police unit for the job. Ritchie is fascinating just likeFrank Lucas, he gets things done his way despite being on the rightside of the law. The fascinating climax of the film has these twopowerful opposing forces meeting for the first time. However, that'swhere my only complaint with the film is. The scene is, well, brief.They meet, make eye contact and then boom, next scene. Naturally thescene would be brief, especially in a movie, since from watching themovie we all know what is going to happen as the film has only beenbuilding up to this for two hours. However to better capture theintensity of that scene something more could have been done.Though, by the time the film is over, a very brisk two and half hours Imight add, you'll be ready to put this on the shelf next to Scorsese'sbest crime film's. --- 9/10Rated R for violence, profanity, and drug use. Ages 13+

2012-04-30 11:43:52

Bought a DVD

Speedy delivery from the USA to Europe. Happy both with the product and the speed. To be recommended

stalker vogler 2012-04-29 17:52:06

A great homage to the American cinema of the seventies and a paradoxical appraisal of American black culture

By the time The French Connection hit the screens in the earlyseventies, blaxploitation movie was at its peak. At the same time, asthis movie implies, a black drug dealer, Frank Lucas, was making afortune. This movie is, in more than one ways, a tribute to the amazingAmerican movie era of the seventies and a recognition of the situationof American black people in the same period when they were strongenough to fight for their rights but still had no place in the moviesto make their point. Frank Lucas is a character who, by completelyseparating himself from the Italian Mafia and going directly to thesource, manages to build a drug empire around Harlem. And who else tosee the law is respected but the good old NYPD, only the drug squad isover its head in corruption and abuse. It's up to one guy (RussellCrowe) to set the record straight, make sure the streets are clean,and, what's more important, make sure the police is clean.This is essentially the whole plot, there are many twists and subplotsthat keep everything going and give the characters depth. It's truethat most of this is not original. The references to The FrenchConnection are explicit in the plot, camera work (see the dynamics thatbrought Friedkin's movie its well-deserved fame), characters etc. But Ithink that the critics who said the movie was unoriginal are missingthe point. Given that the whole thing starts from the premise of a truestory it was only natural that nothing would be "original". Butoriginality can also mean the way a story is told, and I can hardlybelieve that this amazing package of a story was delivered by RidleyScott. Everything is very well balanced, the movie may seem baffling attimes but nothing is left to chance and every shot in this long moviehas a point to make. The dialogues are very well-written and seem quitenatural. The "don't look at the camera in order to appear life-like"strategy that backfired in movies such as United 93 works perfectlyhere. Long continuous shots (sometimes filmed with a hand-held camera)are alternated with montages giving the movie a lot of spunk; theoverall editing is very good. The music could have been better but Ithink the reality effect this movie is trying to produce is enhanced bya more discrete soundtrack. The acting is fine, Denzel is top notch andCrowe is much more refined in his acting than the 1997 LA Confidentialcop.I think that this movie tries, and succeeds, in being an homage toAmerican cinema of the seventies and at the same time making a pointabout the black community (which was the subject of abuse in The FrenchConnection). By choosing what is regarded as a black icon of Hollywoodto play the part of the paradoxically progressive Frank Lucas,Hollywood is finally beginning to learn to be politically correctwithout rubbing your face into it. The movie clearly shows that drugswere the only solution for a discriminated against person living in acountry that was fighting an absurd war. It also clearly shows theoverwhelming corruption of the system and the consequences of abuse ofpower when being an American gangster was more honorable than being anAmerican "cop". Great job for Ridley Scott, I wouldn't have put mymoney on it but it all worked out in the end...!

aleix_wiggum_93 2012-04-29 15:19:40

Simply, a masterpiece. One of the best of the year and the history.

"American Gangster"..... What can I say? American Gangster is not anusual film. It's special. It has all that a film can dream. It arrivesto the perfection. Ridley Scott is one of the best directors (in my ownopinion) of the history. I think that American Gangster is his bestfilm since Gladiator. Well, the acting is superb. What a wonderfulacting! Russell Crowe, Denzel Washington, Ruby Dee, Carla Gugino, JoshBrolin.... And fortunately, Cuba Gooding Jr. probably will put a newdirection in his career, because his last films were absolutely awful.The recreation of the 70's is perfect in all the things. The soundtrackhas good songs and it adapts very well to the film in every moment thatappears. The script is simply, but often, a simply script makes amasterpiece. And finally, Ridley Scott rules! My man, make more perfectfilms. And I just want to recommend this wonderful jewel of the cinema.RIDLEY SCOTT RULES! American GANGSTER RULES!

dkenney39 2012-04-28 23:10:27

Boring Crime Film

Let me start out by saying that this film is nowhere near as good asother crime films like goodfellas, the departed, and scarface. A lot ofpeople are talking about this film becoming a classic, but i don'tagree with that. This movie is different from the other classics inthat this movie is very boring. Most of the movie is a lot of talk, andit's not even that good of dialogue. i think there is one actionsequence where he shoots somebody on the street and hits somebody witha piano. other than that, it is all talk.If you want to see a crime film, do yourself a favor and skip this onebecause it will not become a classic.And i forgot, the acting was okay. Washington was alright but the movieis the problem.3/10

SandyLeung 2012-04-27 04:53:56

A movie of a score 85 to me

This movie does not let me down at all. It's exciting, gripping andinspiring with positive messages about gangsters, corruption, marriage,etc, like many other gangster movies.Denzel Washington's role is more convincing as he should be as thecalm, low-profile and strong-willed man. Russell Crowe's role is even abit more realistic, as a man full of weaknesses and flaws. Butpersonally I find his appeal (as in Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind)seriously fading, partly because of his hairstyle and partly thelimited role he's playing this time.The movie itself is convincing as it's based on a true movie. The plotis well developed and there are very few gaps to fill in. Somethingthat displeases me is the excessive romances of the two characters,although I admit that they help to make up a complete plot.The thing I like about the movie is that it does not involve too muchblood and gun shooting. It is the ideas and characters which strike theaudience and let them think, not the weapons or the blood.Having said that, without the personal charm of Denzel and Russel, Iseriously doubt if the movie would be as successful as it is. I mean,critically speaking, the movie's success still lies much in the goodcharacters rather than the plot.I am from Hong Kong and I find the movie's style very much like manylocal gangster movies, like Inferno Affairs and products of Johnny To,especially the ending scence withe background music of Amazing Grace.Overall, I see no reason why this is not an excellent movie, and whyDenzel should not be nominated, or at least dubbed, as the Best Actorof the year.

thebengalimafia-1 2012-04-26 20:27:19

A modern Classic!

Apart from seeing The Departed last year, I can't remember the lasttime I saw a good mob movie. Maybe that's a good thing, since mobmovies these days aren't what they used to be, anyway. It's also been awhile since we've gotten to see Denzel as an out of control bad guy.Strangely enough, American Gangster isn't really a mob movie, andDenzel isn't out of control either.American Gangster shows us how Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) tookover Harlem in the 1970s. In the hay day of heroin, he sold it at twicethe potency and half the price and he never got caught. How did he dothat? By taking a Wal-Mart style approach to the drug trade. Lucas goesto the jungles of Vietnam himself and buys directly from themanufacturer. He then ships it back in the coffins of dead soldiers.That's when I realized what I was watching. It's not about the mob;it's about Frank Lucas, the man who won out over the mob, and about andthe man chasing him, Ritchie Roberts (Russell Crowe).Unlike most gangsters of the era Lucas never wears his career and moneyon his sleeve. As he reprimands his brother for wearing clothes thatare too flashy, we get to see the beauty in his method. He dresses likea moderately successful businessman, keeps a low profile, and spendsevenings at home with his family. He even takes his mother to church onSundays. When he does make a "public" appearance, he's with baseballplayers and other celebrities, not drug lords and business partners.But all that subtle modesty doesn't stop him from shooting a man in thehead in broad day light.It's this "modest" lifestyle coupled with his death grip on hisbusiness that takes him to the top. Lucas is a polar opposite of theman trying to put him behind bars, Ritchie Roberts. Early on in thefilm, Roberts finds $1 million in cash and rightfully turns it in. Forthis, he is ridiculed by other police officers for being a boy scout.It was sad to see someone ostracized for doing the right thing. Andscenes like this brought me back to the fact that I was watching a truestory, not a work of fiction.For nearly half of the film, Roberts doesn't even know he's looking forFrank Lucas. And how could he? Lucas keeps that ever so low profile,and it gets to the point where all business is done through Franksbrother and then to him. The idea of a black man taking away the drugbusiness from the Mafia was unheard of, but Frank did it. There's no"guns blazing" end to this film. Ritchie and Frank sit down and have aconversation. With Frank's help, Ritchie ends up taking down themajority of the Drug Task Force in New York.There should be no doubt that the film does touch on both drugtrafficking and police work, but it also takes a look at the effects onthe families of the two sides, respectively. While Lucas does as muchas he can to provide for his family, Roberts gives up his marriage andhis son to put the bad guys behind bars. Both men have to deal withlying to the people they love, and oddly enough, they both face policecorruption head on. This is probably what leads to their mutualrespect.American Gangster is a modern classic. I have to say that Denzel issuch a likable actor, that even though he plays a ruthless drug lord,we're always sitting there, hoping he wins.

faisaliqbal2 2012-04-26 07:03:16

a fair ride.....bits n pieces of which seen before....

American gangster has its good star cast...the main leads RUSSELL andDENZIL...both portray their role quite well. while watching the movieyou do feel like been there before...some thing like BLOW...and onescene reminded me of GOODFELLAS...well said that the movie is a lengthyride ...and still keeps the interest of the viewer... do not go towatch the movie with too high expectations........and you will bepleased..... the action in the movie is close to reality and not verytempting...its the acting that really carries the movie on itsshoulders....i still wished more from the movie ....there fore i wouldgive the movie a 7 out of 10

chedenberg 2012-04-25 22:22:02

2 Hours I'll never get back

Denzel, you're rich already, go sit down. Go golf with Tom Hanks andLeonardo. I think we're all sick of over seeing all 3 of you. As far asthis movie goes, blah blah, been done to death. Italians, Cubans,"Niggros", it's all the same. And speaking of that accent - so sad,Denzel. I had a giant crush on you, wanted to have your babies. I usedto worship the ground you floated over! But, Dude, stick a fork in,you're done!Tell Tom I said HI - and you should both go check out the kinds ofmovies Jimmy Stewart and Henry Fonda did as they aged. It'll be clearthat cowboys (and gangsters) aren't attractive for the mature actor'scareer.

2012-04-25 06:10:36

Denzel *the man*

This film, American Gangster, was a real treat.I especially enjoyed the unrated extended version of this film.A far more satisfying finish, I feel.

Philby-3 2012-04-24 19:49:39

Familiar but well told story

Gangster movies usually bore me witless ("The Godfather" and "TheSopranos" apart), but Ridley Scott is an interesting director and thestory here is derived from real events. The style of the film is busy –there is often far more going on the tightly edited scenes than theviewer can take in at once - but as it progresses things fall intoplace and the two parallel stories of Harlem drug lord Frank Lucas andincorruptible New Jersey detective Richie Roberts eventually merge. AsLucas, Denzil Washington puts in his usual solid performance, andRussell Crowe, with a rather less interesting character- the only thingunusual about him is that he is an honest copper- fits the roleperfectly. What is more, he speaks every line audibly, an object lessonto some of today's fashionable actors who all seem to think they areBrando. The gang members here, though, just about need sub-titles, andthere are so many it is difficult to keep track of who's who.Much of the story – set in the period 1968 to 1974 – is familiar tothose of us around at the time – US army personnel smuggling pureheroin from SE Asia back to the US of A in coffins, police corrupted bythe vast amounts of money involved, the rise of black crime bosses. Themovie doesn't dig too far into motivation – greed is accepted assufficient. Frank Lucas's gang operates as a family business, with fivebrothers and numerous cousins in the organization but he keeps almostall the money for himself, resenting paying even $10,000 a month tobent coppers while amassing $250 million in offshore bank accounts. Hisboldest ploy was to cut out the middleman and buy pure heroin directfrom a surprisingly urbane ex-Kuomintang general hiding in a remoteSouth-East Asian jungle (probably Burma). His customers got Frank's"Double Blue" heroin at twice the strength for half the price. This ofcourse killed more people, but Frank never seems to be short ofcustomers.Without giving the game away it can be said that Richie is fairlysuccessful in his efforts against the heroin trade, but others, someselling other drugs, sprang up to take Frank's place. Ridley Scottdoesn't go into the issue, but this story clearly shows the futility oftreating drug abuse as a criminal law rather than a public healthproblem. Unfortunately the puritanical origins of the United States arestill reflected in public attitudes towards addiction. The addict is asinner and must suffer to be redeemed. Punishment is more importantthan rehabilitation, and drug dealers are beyond the pale altogether(actually I would go along with the last bit as long as it includedtobacco company executives). Anyway, as I said, Ridley Scott staysclear of the issue. He gives us a familiar story, cleverly framed andwell presented.